[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Had a discussion over at a swedish forum about hdr, and the op had problem reproducing a hdr image based on 3 shots.

I havent been utilitizing hdr images for years,i used them alot when i was into 3d modelling and rendering.

So i though i give it a try.

So i downloaded the photomatix trial, and went out the door with my camera.

Camera on tripod

Iso:100 F/9
White balanceunny.

Camera set to manual mode.
(Set aperture to F/9 )

Took out my sekonic L-558R and meter for the highlights and the shadows.
(Also metered several parts of the scene, and then used the average function of my meter(works like matrix metering on the camera, but more precise)

Highlights 1/640 s


Shadows 1/20 s


Average metering 1/100 (here you can also see approx. where i spot metered for highlights/shadows)



And here is the result after generating a image based on 16 images ranging from 1/20 s to 1/640 s


I played around with the tonemapper, to get the most natural results i could (need alot of practice to get it to look right)

Any tips/advice/comments are welcome.

Bare in mind that this was just a test scene, i know the image in it self istn very exciting.

Would love comments from Hdr veterans like Irma and Mr G. (but offcourse from anyway that have a opinion/knowledge)

/Paul L.

[NT73]

The HDR captures more on the ground but the sky looks a bit too realistic somehow.
All in all HDR makes things appear as though you had just regained your sight after blindness. Everything crisp and vivid.

[Irma]

I like your picture a lot... 16 images is a lot of information to create an HDR image... I have only tried with 7 images...

The sky looks great and the clouds white, you don't have halos in the hard contrast places in the image like tree/sky or tree/buildings... The colors look very natural... sometimes the program tends to give a grey hue in the pictures, I really like it... but... I just have a question... how is the detail in the trees? ... specially in the branches sticking out of the tree... Did you got noise in the process with photomatix? I can't see noise in your sky... It looks very clean to me...

It is great that you have tried HDR technique, Paul. I look forward to seeing more images

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Thanx Irma, i did get very soft images before i checked align images when i generated the hdr. The tree detail is fairly good, even though it was pretty windy.

Here is another test shot.

Same setup.

Spot metered the shadows/highlights with my sekonic L-558R

Highlights 1/100 S


Shadows 5 Seconds


Average metering 1/3 S


Hdr image based on 28 files. ranging from 5 seconds to 1/100 S.



surely it could be improved, but im pretty pleased with the results thus far. Im very pleased with the performance and accuracy of my Sekonic L-558R.

Any thoughts/advice/critique ?

/Paul L.

[Irma]

Very nice treatment as well in this one...

The colors look very natural... did you work any post processing in PS after photomatix? What I like a lot is the blue of the sky through all those branches of the trees... This is what I really find great!!

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Thanx Irma.

My goal was to make it to look as natural as possible, but to add the extra dr.

The color boost was mostly done in photomatix tone mapping. The only ps work was creating a little more sepparation between the channels (LAB), and then saved for web.

Thanx for the input, much appreciated.

/Paul L.

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Btw Irma do you know of any other HDR software for mac other then photomatix ?

I made a hdr just based on 3 images, and the diffrence is quite apparent.

28 images

3 images




Thanx

/Paul L.

[Irma]

There is one called "Greg's Photosphere" I really don't know if there is another one... but do you have CS2? if so, you can make a nice HDR there? specially if you are taking all those pictures to create your HDR...

I think Photomatix came to help CS2 since you can't get and HDR image from one single raw file in CS2... as you can do in photomatix...
I think the effect you get with CS2 when you have so many images to creat the HDR is great...

Let me have a look in the HDR groups in flickr... maybe they know about something else... If I can't see anything I will post a question there so maybe the info will take a bit of time...

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Thanx Irma, will google around for it.

I just tried cs to do a hdr, but i found the results far from as pleasing as the Photomatix, i assume the tone mapping is whats missing ? I saw that you could get it as a plugin if im not misstaken. I quite like photomatix, so ill play around with it for now.

Correct me if im wrong, but the disadvantage of making a hdr of a singel raw file, is that there is quite limited ammount of data recorded to make a hdr file that is comparable (this offcourse depends on the dr of the original scene) with a hdr based on several files.

I noticed quite a increase in detail/dr from the 3 images hdr and the 28 hdr (no suprise lol)


Thanx a bunch for the advice Irma, your da .. women ?..

/Paul L.

[Irma]

It is supposed that from a raw file you can get as many different exposures as your raw converter program let you do... but at least in my images the more exposures I get from a raw the nosier my result is... and for some reason my details are much better if I have more pictures with different exposures...

However, it is also very good to know how to get an HDR image from a sigle file because of action pictures, where you just have one file to work with...

What I have tried is to open my raw file in CS2 and work with exposure and curves to get an image a bit flat but covering all the histogram... without anything blown out or under exposed... convert it in a 16 or 32 bit tiff and make the mapping in CS2 or photomatix... and you get a nice picture...

I will post tomorrow some pictues I have got from one raw file with different methods and I will post the original...

I think too much has to do with the original picture and the place/thing you photograph.... if there is a hard contrast in it... it is much better to have more pictures with different exposures to get more detail in the dark areas... If there is no much contrast with a single raw file you can get that 3D look you get from an HDR image...

After all this, I couldn't say I use just one technique for my HDR images.... and still I think I know nothing about HDR... there are so many things to learn about this technique...

No need to thank Paul... It has been a pleasure to talk about all this today...

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

Thanx Irma.

I belive the reason the results from one raw file is not as good, is the simple fact that you cant push a raw file all that much. ie. pushing 2-3 stops to bring out shadow detail will increase the noise, highlights are hard to salvage even from a raw file, when its blown.

Looking forward to your examples.

/Paul L.

[smarti77]

Very interesting thread. Thanks for posting the examples. I have had some very mixed result with HDR. I agree that single image HDR's are useful but limited. I have even had some limited results with HDR using single image JPG's. I just open the same image twice in photomatix / generate hdr / tone mapping.... Mainly useful for revealing shadows.
This one has had some other processing done (mainly the invert) in photoshop but photomatix was used to HDR from a single JPG image...



I understand that this could probably be done with other processing methods without HDR but I have found it an easy and useful tool.

The times I have tried multiple exposure HDR something always seems to move and gives ghostly results...trees / water / bugs / people (all my favourite subjects)...
Shane